Why Barnie Choudhury case is blow to public’s right to know
UK Supreme Court in London. Picture: Shutterstock Barnie Choudhury devoted five years to exposing what he describes as misconduct in the judiciary, and particularly in the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) for England and Wales. He wrote more than 20 stories, made a forensic tool of the Freedom of Information (FOI) process, and became the go-to confidante for whistle-blowing judges. Today, however, he awaits the judgment of an Information Tribunal that will decide whether he must pay over £14,000 in costs for his ‘unreasonable behaviour’. He is supported by the NUJ, and lawyers Jacob Meagher and Alexander Hutton KC working pro bono. Should the case go against him, he says he risks personal ruin. His journey from tip-off to tribunal is a twisty one. It is a cautionary story for those who pursue FOI requests beyond initial rejection and casts light on troubling potential conflicts of interest in the governance of judicial appointments. In 2020, Choudhury, a BBC veteran of 24 years, was approached by a stranger at a private dinner party. “I’m a judge, can …
